Review3 Biotech2025
Improving the use of CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing machinery as a cancer therapeutic tool with the help of nanomedicine.
Review in 3 Biotech, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hippo-YAP/TAZ signaling in gastric cancer: molecular pathogenesis and emerging therapeutic horizons.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2026Review
- Long non-coding RNAs and therapeutic resistance in multiple myeloma: from molecular insights to clinical applications.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- LncRNA in gastric cancer drug resistance: deciphering the therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CRISPR-Cas9 (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats-associated protein 9) has revolutionized gene editing tools and paved the way for innovations in medical research for disease diagnosis and treatment. However, better specificity and efficient delivery of this gene machinery make it challenging to successfully edit genes for treating various diseases. This is mainly due to cellular barriers, instability in biological environments, and various off-target effects that prohibit safe and efficient delivery under in vivo conditions. This review examines several delivery modes [plasmid, mRNA, RNP (ribonucleoprotein)] and methods for the CRISPR-Cas9 system delivery, focusing on its potential applications in cancer therapy. Biocompatibility and cytotoxicity are crucial factors determining their safe and effective use. Various nanomaterials have been reviewed for their biocompatibility, limitations, and challenges in treating cancer. Among the reviewed nanoparticles, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) stand out for their biocompatibility due to their biomimetic lipid bilayer that effectively delivers CRISPR/Cas9 cargoes while reducing toxicity. We discuss challenges in in vivo delivery and associated findings such as encapsulation, target delivery, controlled release, and endosomal escape. Future directions involve addressing limitations and adapting CRISPR-Cas9 for clinical trials, ensuring its safe and effective use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.